Momac

Not sure why this is but there is a thing that some people think they have the best boat there is and anything else is inferior in one way or another. It's not confined to the canals. I know one couple who are particularly bad for this sort of thing. To be honest I have no problem with and don't blame people if they do wish to live aboard and continuously cruise and not pay council tax. I don't think anyone really should be complaining about that as long as the continuous cruising is exactly what it should be. going back and forth on the same bit of canal isn't continuously cruising. By the way not everyone pays council tax even if they do live in a house. eg older folk live with their adult children , anyone generally under the age of 18 and even folks like my next door neighbours sons who are in their 30's and still living with their parents.

There were some EA guys out with a police officer (CSO type) late summer in a RIB and they were questioning a fishist in a dinghy . I dare say he had no rod license nor a license for the dinghy. The EA would not have been interested in the dinghy. It does show a patrol can catch people without the proper license. C&RT do have 'Rangers' . I believe they operate from the shore rather than off a boat which is probably the more efficient method. Perhaps there should be more rangers. Identifying the owner of a boat with no name and no index must be a drain on C&RT resources. Increased license fees presumably don't help as they add to the incentive to evade paying. Not sure what the answer is but its C&RT's problem.

Or perhaps C&RT should bring their online system up to date so the boater can share the insurance certificate and receipt for the moorings. If this is a challenge for some boaters then perhaps simply requiring the boater to have evidence available in case of being asked for it by a C&RT employee.

This is true. But it doesn't mean everyone has to provide evidence of a mooring agreement each time they buy a license. Nothing has changed (yet) in the license buying process providing the home mooring has not changed. It all seems like more admin for the boater but also for C&RT for little gain. But who knows what is in C&RTs future plan. Maybe they intend to target and attack home moorers next.

That data should be made available but I suspect low numbers on all items. There is no advantage to seeking permission to overstay if C&RT are not active. I would also be interested in the data for unlicensed boats.

It's not the cruising that is the issue its the lack of it, which appears to be a regular thing. Obviously not aimed at those who do genuinely cruise continuously in the spirit of the idea of exploring the inland waterways.

Having just an hour ago bought a license valid from tomorrow I can conform they (C&RT) do rely on the boaters word that he has a home mooring and insurance. This is providing there is no change in the home mooring location. It's only the BSS certificate that C&RT can see but that's because C&RT are part owners of BSS so its data that is easily shared. Which reminds me I need to arrange a fresh BSS.

Well that's not what C&RT say . Maybe it was the new boat added which messed it up. Edit P.S. For information I just now bought a new license to start from tomorrow and it processed online with no evidence of a mooring contract required .

Too much of good thing. Similarly I met a boat salesman who was about to retire. In retirement his wish was never again to set foot on another boat.

C&RT are not asking existing customers for evidence of a mooring contract at the point of purchasing a license . But when the customer changes the home mooring location they will ask for evidence.. C&RT may ask for evidence of a mooring contract at any time if they wish.

All words are made up and many come into commonly understood use . 'Language' is in itself a made up word. New words and terms come and go If the term 'continuous cruiser' was made up by BW it must have been in use over more than a decade?

Thank you for confirming the boat in question is moored appropriately.

This picture appears to show ample room for another boat to get water assuming the bollard is the water point. Nothing apparently wrong with that.

This is the case at a marina near my home berth where they will only sell at the 60/40 if its going into a boat. But they will allow 100% domestic if its a small quantity like 20L going into a can/tub.

I think you can probably get a discount if you buy a significant volume. Not sure what that volume is but guess its greater than the volume of most boat tanks. I have never heard of greater than the pump price charged for a smaller volumes. The nearby marina is happy to sell 20L at domestic rate as long as it goes into a tub or jerry can and not into a boat.

I figured Carols forecast may have been for Scotland. Maybe you should have been clearer about the country where snow was forecast .

I agree Also if kept clean , which in many cases is not really very challenging, its easier to spot any developing fluid leaks.

I guess there was some some snow somewhere . But i didn't see any. Did you ?

But it didn't work I did have an A series in one car that dis not leak oil but I think that was unique

The data below from Renology states 100W from a 1.062m x 0.53m panel. That comes to 177W per square metre while the Renology 200W panel is almost exactly 1 square metre . A domestic solar installer on the internet claimed more like 150W per square metre which may be more of a real life expectation.

It will be interesting to discover why.